Government is evil by its very nature

I don't see how any person(s) has the ethical authority to initiate aggression (extract taxes) against his fellow man. What allows one man to rule another?

 

This is an example of authoritarian statist evil. Where do you guys come from?

 

That is correct. The democrats are almost as bad as the republicans when it comes to over reaching governmental power.

 

"statism"...you sound like a well read individual. Statists are tools of the state and...

I'm sorry. I'm laughing at you.

Debating children like yourself is entertaining for about a minute or so. Then the adults, who recognize that a society exists with needs and whatnot, well then guys like you disappear. Why don't you tell us how Ninjas are such badasses or how taxation is keeping you down, etc., etc.

 

Do try to grow up.

Are you familiar with the Constitution? You are not, are you?

And you are an authoritarian statist.

 

You may think you are clever but only in select circles. Your entire premise appears to be that it is a logical fallacy to admit evidence into the proceedings. If you prefer the company of anarchists, go to a place where you can do what you want at will. I suggest you take some self-defense classes before you go.

 

make an argument or disappear you basement dweller. Most people with a brain would recognize that anyone citing implied contracts might know a bit about the matter at hand. But you don't. So pathetic. Let me and my two law degrees help you. NOW, what do you want to know about the constitution and freedom? I'm a Locke fan, a Nietszche fan, and on and on. We can have a very probing discussion.

You start. What's your view on the tension between federal governmental power and individual liberties?

 

You are just some authoritarian statist on the Internet. I tend to doubt you have ever read Locke. Nor Montesquieu. Nor Bastiat.

You know absolutely nothing about the Constitution. And less about individual liberty. You are the sort of person Hayek warned us about.

Nice try though.

- - - Updated - - -

By the way I love your self assured arrogance. It will not get you anywhere. But is is cute.

 

At their core, people are depraved. They're evil. in Christian terms, they're sinners. There is always going to be an ability to do good, however it is often met with some corruption. Collectively getting together to form a society is going to be flawed, and that resulting government will be tainted in the same way.

 

Bastiat is a turd. Montcue is not worth my time. You know some of my philosophical likes. I also tend towards Einsten, Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Jung, and whatnot.

Come on. Let's discuss the US Constitution, antecedents, precedents, projections...come on! You are such a presumed cosmopolitan.

I stand in the shadow of your knowledge.

Come on! Start the ball rolling on contemporary Constitutional Interpretation re the moral character of federalized government.

 

The consent of the governed. I have no problem conceding to government the legal use of force necessary to oppose the first use of force. Collection of tax at that point becomes nothing more than beating the first users of force to the punch.

Don't get me wrong. In my opinion, almost everything currently done by force of law should not be done by force at all.

 

A government by and for the people is what? Is it tyranny just b/c you, as an individual, might not get your way? Or is that characterization merely pointing a childish appreciation of democratic governance? What about a democracy further tempered by a republican frame?

 

I did not imply it. Back up one of your claims for a change and show where I implied any such thing or bugger off.

What a joke.

 

I agree. The only ethically legitimate relationships are voluntary and consensual. Without consent (i.e. agreement or permission) one man has no ethical basis for ruling another.

 

Einstein was a socialist. Your taste and dismissals tell me a great deal about your stance. I suspect you believe the point of a law education is to find your way around the Constitution's safeguards.

You may read as many of my posts here as you like. You can gains a significant understanding of my views on the purpose of a Constitution as a means of strictly limiting government. We are no longer under a Constitutional form of government.

And yes, you do stand in my shadow. We can agree on that.

 

The framers rightly feared democracy. This nation was not established as a democracy. Tyranny flows from eliminating divided powers. We have a lot of that these days. Many of our nearly 500 independent agencies make law, enforce it and sometimes even judge it. That is tyranny.

Those measure that go beyond Constitutional permissions are all ripe for tyrannical actions.

- - - Updated - - -

Of course you did. Simply reread what you wrote.

 

"Least worse way to oppose the first use of force" now there is a phrase that runs around the fringes of truth and says absolutely nothing in the true form of a logical fallacy. Government is nothing more than the cowards attempt to avoid the inevitable, which is then exploited by psychopaths to create tyranny against the masses.

- - - Updated - - -

I stand corrected.

 

You are seriously confused, economy does not exist as a result of government, economy is manipulated to benefit the wealthy and government by government. Inflation is a byproduct of governmental interference in the natural free market. The army should not exist at all in times of peace, as our forefathers warned us to the dangers of a standing army.

 

If you have an argument, make it. Obviously you do not because other than personal attacks which are against the policy of this forum you have made no points whatsoever. All points of debate are welcome, but trolls who simply come here to originate childish personal attacks against other posters are not welcome.

 

Probably a government employee. That or they missed their calling.

 

The inflation in question existed because of the debt incurred through war loans required to be independent.

The Army was owed money due to its service and the government couldn't pay them. Said army was also the militia intended to defend the nation in case of attack. Our government was so weak it could neither pay its debt nor it's soldiers for the war required for the nation to exist in the first place.

BTW did you seriously just argue that inflation only exists due to government action? Because that is utter bull(*)(*)(*)(*). I say that as an economist.

 

You are a wealth of logical fallacies. Evidence that is composed of logical fallacies is not evidence, it is a lie and therefore not evidence of anything. Life must be very confusing to someone who cannot determine truth from lies.

 

Excellent form! Your tasteful method of handling trolls is admirable.

 

I love your avatar.

 

This is the core point. While man may attempt to form agencies to provide service, they must understand that any power entrusted to other humans will be misused due to mans inherent corrupt nature. The degree to which humans succumb to corruption is only limited by their access to power. As government grows, so does theft and tyranny.